criterionforum.org

My friend saw The Kids Are Alright up in Vancouver a few weeks ago and has been raving about it non-stop. He particularly favored Benings' performance, saying it (like the film itself) might have been the best of the year.

It's not really a new film, this has played everywhere already. It's the best movie ever, it was a great success everywhere, phenomenal acting, great plot, really original. =;

1. Don't complain about newness. As someone who's been here a year you should know that something ten years old let alone a couple of months isn't all that old by the standards of topic on this board.
2. I hope you are joking about this being the best film ever otherwise watch a hell of a lot more movies with a hell of a lot more variety. Even if this was good by some standard the generic nature and basic goals would keep it grounded to an average entertainment. It doesn't even contain the accidental greatness of a Glen or Glenda? nor Incubus.

I think the "newness" thing is a jab in relation to the first post's mention of a "first look" review of a film that played in American theaters last summer.

Tom Hagen wrote:I think the "newness" thing is a jab in relation to the first post's mention of a "first look" review of a film that played in American theaters last summer.

If so, it was a pretty feeble jab. By 'first look', I meant that the review had been published under a 'Passing Judgement' rubric, i.e. it was intended to represent the writer's 'first impressions', rather than aiming to be an in-depth assessment.

By 'first look', did you think I meant that this reviewer was the only person on the planet who had henceforth seen the film?

Yes

domino harvey wrote:Yes

Oh.

This is a clumsily-directed, poorly written film that is barely salvaged by most of the actors, with one exception. In true Oscar fashion, it appears the worst performance is nominated and primed to potentially win. Annette Bening is handily the weakest link here-- I am quite agog at the praise she's received for doing nothing. Moore's complimentary role isn't written much better but she's at least given more to do and is better at that sort of thing. The two bright spots here are really Mark Ruffalo and Mia Wasikowska. Praising Ruffalo seems redundant, as isn't he great in everything? Nevertheless, despite the film's odd tonal shift against the most likable character in the movie as it drew to a close, he's the best thing here. Right behind him is Wasikowska, who I'm glad is taking off, as I think she's part of the refreshing class of new talent infiltrating cinema after a long period of few breakout starlets. Too bad they're not in another movie.

I actually found Ruffalo totally miscast in the film. He just seems to be trying to hard to be a character that he isn't. He's too nice of a guy and it becomes obvious that he is attempting to show his version of aloof asshole rather than becoming one. If I can give this pos one compliment it is that it shows how horrendous a mistake Ruffalo as Greenberg would have been.

If he's supposed to be an asshole, that only speaks to how badly written this movie is, because I definitely liked him more than any other adult hanging around. Speaking of writing, there is some horrible dialog in this movie (Top prize goes to the skater wanting to pee on a dog's head, with runner up definitely "I need parenting advice from you like I need a dick in my ass"). And is it not a little weird that the plot of a movie which flaunts its lesbian bonafides hinges on a heterosexual sexual coupling, and doesn't do the couple at the center of the film any favors by making them husband/wife stereotypes only transplanted to a gay relationship? Progressive

You're right 100%. I was down right offended at the Apatow like flaunting of progressive values only to wind up in a regressive idiotic film where the villain is the only character of interest. Though I have to say the film leaves it's lowest point for the end. I hate it so.

Just saw this and I mostly agree with domino's take on this. Yes, Ruffalo is almost always good, but this role taps right into his sort of blissed-out, new-agey persona, which is unique; and he creates a nuanced version of a pretty specific L.A. type of person (the laid-back, affably self-absorbed hipster/East Sider). I think he's actually better than the writing: Cholodenko pretty much throws him under the bus at the end of the movie, which turns out to be a real miscalculation, since Ruffalo has quietly made his character more sympathetic than the shrill lesbian couple.

I didn't hate Annette Bening or Julianne Moore, but I also didn't think they managed to transcend the middlebrow safeness of the whole project, either.

I'm interested in seeing this primarily b/c I like Ruffalo, Moore, and Bening, but this thread has tempered my expectations a great deal.

The NY Times has a short interview with Lisa Cholodenko.